One thing you learn as you get older is just how much the entire world runs on the concept of plausible deniability. It's kind of a core basis for human interaction, and it gets especially sophisticated in complex organizations with power structures.

It goes back a very long way. Just google the phrase "meddlesome priest" for a particularly illustrative and amusing example.

Corporate speak is just a combination of that with the more prosaic concept of jargon.

Jargon, the part that doesn't involve purposeful obfuscation at least, is often highly useful for saving time because it allows people who engage in repeated interactions to be highly specific. The phrase "annual review" could mean a bunch of things, but a Y1-AAR could be a specific set of questions with a specific range of predetermined outcomes for a specific type of employee.

When jargon is done well it's just really effective, people within an org can communicate highly efficiently with extremely clear meaning. When corporate weasel words are used well they can be highly effective at communicating intent while obscuring meaning for those in an out group and creating plausible deniability.

For the uninitiated the fact that the two concepts live so closely side by side can be bewildering of course.